acute effects of different stretching techniques on the number of repetitions in a single lower body...

8/16/2019 Acute Effects of Different Stretching Techniques on the Number of Repetitions in a Single Lower Body Resistance T…

1/9

Journal of Human Kinetics volume 45/2015, 177-185 DOI: 10.1515/hukin-2015-0018 177

Section III – Sports Training

1 - Federal University of Rio de Janeiro. Postgraduate Program in Physical Education Stricto Sensu/ UFRJ. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.2 - Department of Physical Education, Associate Graduate Program in Physical Education UPE / UFPB, João Pessoa, Paraíba -

Brazil.3 - California State University, Fullerton. Department of Kinesiology. Fullerton, California.4 – University Estacio de Sá, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro - Brazil

.

Authors submitted their contribution to the article to the editorial board.

Accepted for printing in the Journal of Human Kinetics vol. 45/2015 in March 2015.

Acute Effects of Different Stretching Techniques on the Number

of Repetitions in A Single Lower Body Resistance

Training Session

by

Marcos A. Sá1 , Gabriel R. Neto1,2 , Pablo B. Costa3 , Thiago M. Gomes1,4 ,

Cláudio M. Bentes1 , Amanda F. Brown1 , Jefferson S. Novaes1

This study aimed to investigate the acute effects of passive static and ballistic stretching on maximal repetition

performance during a resistance training session (RTS). Nine male subjects underwent three experimental conditions:

ballistic stretching (BS); passive static stretching (PSS); and a specific warm-up (SW). The RTS was composed of three

sets of 12RM for the following exercises: leg press 45 (LP), leg extension (LE), leg curl (LC), and plantar flexors (PF).

Performance of six sessions was assessed 48 hours apart. The first visit consisted of a familiarization session including

stretching methods and exercises used in the RTS. On the second and third visit, a strength test and retest were

performed. During the fourth to the sixth visit, the volunteers randomly performed the following protocols: BS+RTS;

PSS+RTS; or SW+RTS. For the sum of the RM number of each three-set exercise, significant differences were found

between PSS vs. SW for the LP (p = 0.001); LE (p = 0.005); MF (p = 0.001); and PF (p = 0.038). For the comparison

between the methods of stretching PSS vs. BS, significant differences were found only for the FP (p = 0.019). When

analyzing the method of stretching BS vs. SW, significant differences were found for the LP (p = 0.014) and MF (p =0.002). For the total sum of the RM number of three sets of the four exercises that composed the RTS, significant

differences were observed (p < 0.05) in the following comparisons: PPS vs. SW (p = 0.001), PPS vs. BS (p = 0.008), and

BS vs. SW (p = 0.002). Accordingly, the methods of passive static and ballistic stretching should not be recommended

before a RTS.

Key words: warm-up, ballistic stretching, passive stretching, muscular strength, lower limbs.

IntroductionAccording to the American College of

Sports Medicine (2011), several components

comprise physical fitness, including bodycomposition, cardiorespiratory, neuromotor, and

muscular fitness, which influence positively the

quality of life. The strength and flexibility

components of muscular and neuromotor fitness

have sparked the interest of many researchers and

have been the subject of numerous scientific

studies (Sá et al., 2013; Barroso et al., 2012; Gomes

et al., 2011). Numerous authors presented resultsfrom investigations related to the acute effects of

different stretching methods on subsequent

strength performance (Rubini et al., 2007; Barroso

et al., 2012). These studies compared the acute

effects of static stretching on power performance

Unauthenticated

Download Date | 11 1 15 12:41 AM


2/9

178 Acute effects of different stretching techniques on the number of repetitions ....

Journal of Human Kinetics - volume 45/2015 http://www.johk.pl

(Yamaguchi et al., 2006), peak torque (Cramer et

al., 2004; 2006; 2007), muscle damage (Chen et al.,

2014), muscular endurance (Franco et al., 2008),

maximum voluntary contraction (Ogura et al.,

2007), and maximum 1RM strength (Beedle et al.,

2008; Bacurau et al., 2009; Winchester et al., 2009).Acute effects of dynamic stretching on strength

(Costa et al., 2014), muscle power (Manoel et al.,

2008), peak torque (Ayala et al., 2013; Costa et al.,

2014; Sekir et al., 2010), muscle imbalance (Costa

et al., 2014), and muscle activation (Costa et al.,

2014; Sekir et al., 2010) were also investigated.

However, no studies have examined the acute

effects of static and dynamic stretching on

performance of an entire resistance training

session.

Winchester et al. (2009) investigatedwhether the number of sets of static stretching

performed would decrease the maximum strength

on a knee flexion exercise 1RM test. The authors

reported that one set of static stretching was

sufficient to reduce the levels of strength by 5.4%,

while six sets promoted further reduction of

12.4%. Similarly, Gomes et al. (2011) examined the

effects of static and proprioceptive neuromuscular

facilitation (PNF) stretching on the maximum

number of repetitions at 40, 60, and 80% intensity

of 1RM in the knee extension exercise. Theauthors found no significant differences in

strength performance after static stretching when

compared to the no-stretching condition. In

contrast, Bacurau et al. (2009) reported reductions

in strength in the leg press exercise for passive

static stretching when compared to ballistic

stretching (2.2%) and the control group (13.4%).

However, the authors did not report significant

differences between ballistic stretching and

control groups. Likewise, Barroso et al. (2012)

compared the acute effects of static, ballistic, andPNF stretching on the number of repetitions for

the leg press. The authors reported that all

stretching protocols significantly reduced the

number of repetitions (static stretching: 20.8%;

ballistic stretching: 17.8%) compared with a no-

stretching condition. However, Beedle et al. (2008)

found no differences in maximum strength in the

1RM test of the bench press and leg press

exercises in trained men when preceded by static

and dynamic stretching.

Some physiological mechanisms could beresponsible for explaining such reductions in

strength performance after an intervention with

different stretching methods including: a decrease

in neural activation caused by the Golgi tendon

reflex, changes in viscoelastic properties of

muscle-tendon units, and the arrangement of

muscle fibers (Fowles et al., 2000; Lieber, 2010).Few studies have examined the effects of different

stretching methods on maximal repetition

performance in an entire training session of

resistance training (Sá et al., 2013). Thus, this

study aimed to clarify the acute effects of passive

static stretching and ballistic stretching on

performance during a resistance training session.

Therefore, the purpose of the present study was to

compare the acute effects of passive static

stretching, ballistic stretching, and of a specific

warm-up, on the number of repetitions during alower body resistance training session.

Material and Methods

Participants

Nine men (age: 24.3 ± 3.0 yrs, body mass:

88.8 ± 11.2 kg, body height: 189.0 ± 9.1 cm, BMI:

24.7 ± 1.4 kg/m2) volunteered to participate in the

study. The subjects were physically active, but

none had participated in regular resistance training

for a minimum of six months prior to the start of

the study. All of the participants answered theInternational Physical Activity Questionnaire

(IPAQ) to determine their physical activity level.

To be included in the experiment, volunteers had

to meet the following criteria: not perform any

type of regular physical activity other than the

prescribed resistance training over the course of

the study; and not consume any ergogenic aid that

could influence the collection or interpretation of

data. Study details were explained verbally and in

writing, and all participants read and signed an

informed consent form before participation in thestudy in accordance with the declaration of

Helsinki. The study protocol was approved by the

Research Ethics Committee of the Federal

University of Rio de Janeiro (protocol number

101/2011).

Procedures

The study consisted of six visits with a 48-

hour rest period between following sessions. The

first visit included a familiarization session

including different stretching methods, a specific

warm-up, and exercises that composed theresistance training session (RTS). On the second

Unauthenticated



3/9

by Marcos A. Sá et al. 179

© Editorial Committee of Journal of Human Kinetics

and third day, a test and retest of 1RM were

performed. From the fourth visit forward, subjects

were randomized and counterbalanced into three

experimental protocols: a) ballistic stretching (BS)

+ RTS; b) passive static stretching (PSS) + RTS;

and c) a specific warm-up (SW) with 20repetitions at 30% of the 12RM load + RTS. Thirty

seconds after completing the stretching protocols

and a specific warm-up, the subjects started the

RTS. The lower body RTS included three sets with

the load adjusted to 12RM on the following

exercises: leg press 45 (LP), leg extension (LE), leg

curl (LC), and plantar flexion (PF). All protocols

utilized a 90-second passive rest period between

exercises and sets.

Twelve Repetitions Maximum (12RM) Testing

The 12RM test protocol was performed asfollows: a) a 12-repetition warm-up at 40-60% of

the maximal perceived 12RM load; b) after a

minute of rest period, each subject performed five

repetitions at 60-80% of the maximal perceived

12RM load (Gomes et al., 2011); c) after another

minute of rest, the load test was started, with each

individual performing a maximum of three

attempts for each exercise with a five-minute rest

interval between each attempt; and d) when the

subject could no longer perform the movement at

the amplitude marked by the fleximeter(FLEXIMETER® – Paraná – Brasil), the test was

interrupted and the last complete execution prior

to concentric muscular failure was considered the

maximal load for the 12 repetitions. After

obtaining the load for the first exercise, a 10-

minute rest interval was taken before proceeding

to the next exercise. Forty-eight hours after the

first session, the retest was applied to assess the

reproducibility of the maximal load (12RM). The

execution order of the test exercises was set by the

researcher for every subject and maintainedthroughout the entire experimental procedure. To

reduce the margin of error of the 12RM test, the

following strategies were adopted: a)

familiarization before the test, allowing the

subject to get acquainted with the data collection

routine; b) instructions regarding the exercise

performance techniques; c) evaluator attention to

the position adopted by the subject; d) verbal

encouragement; and e) measurement of the

weights on a precision scale. The 12RM load was

defined as the highest load achieved on both daysof the test with differences smaller than 5%. In

case of a greater difference, the subject returned to

perform a retest again. For this purpose, all

exercises utilized a movement amplitude limiter

to determine the start and end positions of each

exercise.

Stretching ProtocolsFor each method of stretching (passive

static and ballistic), three sets were performed for

each muscle group (i.e., knee flexors and

extensors, hip adductors, and plantar flexors).

Thus, for ballistic stretching, pendulum

movement’s hip adduction and abduction, hip

flexion and extension, knee flexion and extension,

and plantar flexion and extension were

performed. Each set of ballistic stretching lasted 1

min and each pendulum motion of extension and

flexion or adduction and abduction wasperformed in time of one second (Bacurau et al.,

2009) controlled by a metronome. Because these

are combined movements, each muscle group

executing these pendulum movements was

lengthened by 30 s in each set. For both methods

of stretching, exercises were performed

unilaterally on both legs with 30 s of rest. For the

passive static stretching protocol, the movement

was taken to a position of slight discomfort

indicated by the subject and held for 30 s. It is

important to note that each muscle group wasstretched the same amount of time (sets and

sustained time) with a total time of 90 s per

muscle group (ACSM, 2011; Wallmann et al.,

2012).

Statistical Analyses

Data normality was tested by the Shapiro-

Wilk homoscedasticity test (Bartlett criterion). All

variables showed normal distribution and

homoscedasticity. To test the load reproducibility

between the 12RM test and retest, intraclasscorrelation coefficient was utilized (LP, r = 0.99;

LE, r = 0.98; LC, r = 1.00; PF, r = 0.99). One-way

ANOVAs were used to compare the effects of

different experimental protocols (PSS × BS × SW)

on the three-set maximal repetition numbers for

each exercise and on the total RM for the

resistance training session (LP, LE, LC, and PF). In

case of a significant F, a Tukey HSD post hoc was

performed. The statistical procedures were

performed with the SPSS 20.0 program (SPSS Inc.,

USA) and were based on a significance level of p <

0.05.

Unauthenticated



4/9



ResultsTotal number of repetitions in each exercise

There was a significant difference among

all experimental conditions (p < 0.05). A higher

number of repetitions for the SW was observed

when compared to the PSS for the leg press (340vs. 276; p = 0.001), leg curl (286 vs. 212; p = 0.001),

and plantar flexion (286 vs. 212; p = 0.001)

exercises (Figure 1). In addition, in the

comparison between stretching PSS vs. BS, a

significant reduction was observed only for the

plantar flexion exercise (267 vs. 309; p = 0.019).

Furthermore, significant increases were found

between stretching BS vs. SW for leg press (292 vs.

340; p = 0.014) and leg curl (226 vs. 286; p = 0.002),

respectively.

Total number of repetitions in each resistance

training session

A higher number of repetitions was found

for the SW when compared to PSS (1226 vs. 1003,respectively; p = 0.001). In addition, BS showed a

better performance compared to PSS (1101 vs.

1003, respectively; p = 0.008), while the SW

protocol resulted in a higher number of

repetitions than BS (1226 vs. 1101, respectively; p =

0.002) (Figure 2).

Table 1

Stretching protocols in static and ballistic methodsStatic Stretching Ballistic Stretching

Knee extensors

The subject was placed in a prone position on

a padded table and performed unilateral knee

flexion combined with a hip extension.

Standing, the subjects performed unilateral

pendular movements of hip and knee

flexion followed by the hip and knee. The

sets lasted for 1 min and each pendulum

movement was performed in 1 s controlled

by a metronome.

Knee flexorsThe subject was placed in a supine positionon a padded table and performed unilateral

hip flexion with an extended knee.

Standing, the subjects performed pendular

movements flexion and extension of the

unilateral hip with an extended knee. The

sets lasted for 1 min and each pendulum

movement was performed in 1 s controlled

by a metronome.

Hip adduction

The subject was placed in a supine position

on a padded table and performed a unilateral

lateral hip rotation combined with a hip

flexion with a flexed knee.

Standing, the subjects performed unilateral

pendular movements of hip adduction and

abduction. The sets lasted for 1 min and

each pendulum movement was performed

in 1 s controlled by a metronome.

Plantar Flexion

The subject was placed in a supine position

on a padded table and performed a unilateral

plantar flexion with an extended knee.

The subject was placed supine on an

exercise mat, with one knee bent supported

on a step (30 cm). Then, the subject

performed a movement of plantar flexion

and extension for 1 min. Each movement of

plantar flexion or extension lasted for 1 s,

and was controlled by a metronome.

Unauthenticated



5/9



Figure 1

Total number of repetitions in each exercise. LP – leg press; LE – leg extension;

LC – leg curl; PF – plantar flexion; PSS – passive static stretching; BS - ballistic stretching;

SW – specific warm-up; * Significant difference between the SW and PSS;# Significant difference between the SW and BS;

$Significant difference between PSS and BS

Figure 2 Total number of repetitions in each resistance training session. PSS – passive static stretching;

BS - ballistic stretching; SW – specific warm-up; * Significant difference between PSS and BS;# Significant difference between PSS and the SW;

$Significant difference between BS and the SW

Discussion

The purpose of the present study was to

compare the acute effects of static stretching,

ballistic stretching, and a specific warm-up on the

number of repetitions (12RM) in a lower body

resistance training session. Accordingly, theresults of the present study demonstrated that PSS

Unauthenticated



6/9



caused the lowest repetition performance when

compared with the BS and SW methods for all

exercises in the training session. Likewise, for the

sum of all repetitions in all exercises during a

single training session, the lowest performance

was also found in the PSS condition compared tothe BS and SW. Similar results were found by

Barroso et al. (2012). These authors compared the

acute effects of static, ballistic, and PNF stretching

on maximal strength, total volume, and maximum

number of repetitions in the leg-press exercise. In

terms of maximum repetitions, significant

differences were found for the static stretching

and ballistic stretching, with both showing a

lower performance compared to the control

condition (20.8% and 17.7%, respectively). These

results support those of the current study becausesignificant differences were also found between

static stretching and the specific warm-up (18.8%),

and between ballistic stretching and the specific

warm-up (13.5%). As observed, both studies have

similarities regarding stretching techniques.

However, Barroso et al. (2012) used two exercises

(one arm exercise and one leg exercise) whereas

the present study utilized a resistance training

session with four exercises for the lower body,

prioritizing only one body segment. Hence,

similar findings reaffirm the theory that stretchingwould be the main factor responsible for the

decrease in performance.

Gomes et al. (2011) investigated the effects

of static and PNF stretching on the maximum

number of repetitions at intensities of 40, 60, and

80% of 1RM in the leg extension exercise. There

were no significant differences for any of the

intensities (40, 60, and 80%) when comparing

static stretching with the no-stretching condition.

However, in the present study, significant

differences were found with the passive staticstretching presenting a 15.9% higher repetition

number when compared with the specific warm-

up for the leg extension exercise. For static

stretching, both studies used similar techniques,

but as the knee extension exercise for this study

was the second to be performed during the

resistance training session, perhaps the muscular

fatigue added to neural and mechanical effects

provided by static stretching may have resulted in

adverse effects on strength performance.

To examine the effects of static stretchingon muscle endurance performance of the leg curl

exercise, Nelson et al. (2005) conducted two

experiments. In the first experiment, the authors

used 40 and 60% of body weight and analyzed the

maximal number of repetitions performed with

and without static stretching. In the second

experiment, the maximal number of repetitionswas also studied with the same conditions (with

static stretching and without stretching) but using

50% of body weight. For the 40% of body weight

protocol, the maximal number of repetitions was

9.8% lower with stretching when compared with

the no stretching condition. For 60% of body

weight, the maximal number of repetitions after

static stretching was 24% lower than the no

stretching condition. In the second experiment

using 50% of body weight, the static stretching

group’s performance was 28% lower than the nostretching condition (Nelson et al., 2005). In the

present study, significant differences were found

among the condition with a specific warm-up

having a 25.8% and 20.9% higher number of

repetitions than passive static and ballistic

stretching, respectively. Therefore, the effects

were similar to the results of this study, which

leads us to believe that the negative effects of

passive static stretching on muscle endurance

performance seem to be potentiated when applied

to a higher overload.For the plantar flexion exercise, significant

reductions were found with passive static

stretching (13.59%) when compared to ballistic

stretching, and to the specific warm-up (12.45%)

when compared with passive static stretching. In

their study, Fowles et al. (2000) observed that after

one hour the strength levels were still reduced by

9.8%. A plantar flexion exercise was the last to be

performed in the present study and the entire

resistance training session phase lasted

approximately 50 min, thus the static and ballisticstretching effects could still have been present

because the percentages found in both studies

were similar.

Considering the results of all exercises

that comprised the resistance training session, at

least one of the conditions (passive static

stretching and ballistic stretching) resulted in

significant reductions when compared with the

specific warm-up. These results lead us to believe

that both methods affected the resistance training

session performance. Thus, according to theliterature, two theories would justify the results in

Unauthenticated



7/9



this study and could influence the strength

performance negatively as well as act at different

times during the training session. For the first two

exercises (leg press and leg extension), it is

believed that the deficit in strength would be

caused by neural responses, once we comparepercentages of a decrease in performance of this

study with those of Fowles et al. (2000), the results

are quite similar. In order to assess the duration of

the negative effects of passive static stretching on

strength performance, Fowles et al. (2000) had

subjects perform thirteen stretching sets, with a

duration of 135 s each. Their results showed that

the maximum voluntary contraction presented

different performance levels for different time

periods assessed. Therefore, decreases in

performance of 28% immediately after stretching,21% after 5 min, 13% after 15 min, 12% after 13

min, 10% after 45 min, and 9% after 60 min were

reported. In fact, the findings of the present study

are very similar to those reported by Fowles et al.

(2000). These authors observed an increased

performance in the number of repetitions when

comparing passive static stretching vs. a specific

warm up (18.82%), ballistic stretching vs. a

specific warm up (13.5%) for the leg press

exercise. Passive static stretching compared with

the specific warm up showed a 15.92% increase inperformance in the number of repetitions for the

knee extension exercises. If we consider the

execution time and the rest interval between sets,

we notice that at the end of the second exercise

(knee extension) around 20 min of training have

elapsed, therefore justifying the percentages

found in both studies. This performance decrease

may be related to a reduction in neuronal

activation induced by the Golgi tendon organ

(GTO) and because of its location at the

musculotendinous junction, it would beresponsible for detecting the tension experienced

by the muscle (Fowles et al., 2000).

In the third exercise (knee flexion), the

decrease in performance could be related to the

structure of muscle architecture, which may have

been altered by stretching and by the mechanical

stress of the resistance training session. This could

promote changes in muscle fibers and

biomechanical characteristics (Lieber, 2010;

Hindle et al., 2012), generating physiological

changes in muscle structure and consequentlyreducing the performance of RM in a resistance

training session (Abellaneda et al., 2009; Kato et

al., 2010). According to Lieber (2010), changes in

mechanical structures can also lead to a decrease

in performance. Therefore, when a muscle group,

along with the tendons, is under the influence of a

large tension for a long period of time, theviscoelastic structures are altered, causing

changes in stiffness and changing the tendon

structure, thereby providing variations in force

transmittal (Lieber, 2010).

For the fourth and last exercise (plantar

flexion and extension), it was observed that the

results were again similar to those of Fowles et al.

(2000). Because these muscles were not used in the

other three exercises that preceded them, the

gastrocnemius muscle suffered only the negative

effects of stretching. Thus, the time elapsed between stretching and its execution became long,

causing less of a negative effect on strength

performance. As previously stated, Fowles et al.

(2000) found that strength levels decreased in a

similar study (decrease of 13.59% for passive

static stretching vs. ballistic stretching, and a

decrease of 12.45% in performance for ballistic

stretching compared to a specific warm-up). Thus,

it is believed that the same effects caused by a

reduction in neural activation induced by the

GTO are present in this situation, but to a lesserdegree because of the longer time elapsed

between the intervention with stretching and

performing the exercise. With regard to the

muscle architecture, because it was perhaps not

used as much as the other muscles, the

gastrocnemius muscle was not exposed to high

loads or tensions. These conditions might not

have caused the viscoelastic structure changes to

the point of causing an alteration in the stiffness

of the tendon. For the three sets of four exercises,

significantly lower numbers of RM were found forpassive stretching and ballistic stretching

compared to the specific warm-up (11.31% and

9.75% respectively), and significantly lower for

passive stretching compared to ballistic stretching

(1.72%).

The method that showed the least

decrease in force development was the specific

warm-up, whereas passive static stretching

showed to be most inefficient for repetition

performance. The explanation for this negative

performance may be due to the presence of neuralfatigue (due to the stretching method) in addition

Unauthenticated



8/9



to muscular fatigue (due to the RTS). The main

limitation of this study was that the short rest

interval between sets and exercises could affect

the RTS adaptations as well as muscle

architecture, therefore the ultrasound method

(pennation angle, fascicle length, or muscle size)was not examined. Nevertheless, these results

may assist health professionals who prescribe

resistance training and those who work in

rehabilitation to take precaution regarding the

effects of stretching exercises performed before

resistance training. The results are of greater

significance when training is directly dependent

on strength performance.

Conclusions

In conclusion, static and ballistic

stretching should not be recommended before a

resistance training session because according to

the presented results, a pre-exercise stretching

session hinders the subsequent resistance training

performance. Further research is needed to

investigate the influence of different stretching

strategies on an upper body resistance training

session, in different populations, and of different

training levels.

References

Abellaneda S, Guissard N, Duchateau J. The relative lengthening of the myotendinous structures in the

medial gastrocnemius during passive stretching differs among individuals. J Appl Physiol , 2009; 106:

169-177

American College of Sports Medicine. ACSM ́s position stand. Quantity and quality of exercise for

developing and maintaining cardiorespiratory, musculoskeletal, and neuromotor fitness in apparently

healthy adults: guidance for prescribing exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 2011; 43: 1334-1359

Ayala F, Ste CM, Sainz BP, Santonja F. Acute effects of static and dynamic stretching on hamstring eccentric

isokinetic strength and unilateral hamstring to quadriceps strength ratios. J Sports Sci , 2013; 31: 831-839

Bacurau RFP, Monteiro GA, Ugrinowitsch C, Tricoli V, Cabral LF, Aoki MS. Acute effect of a ballistic and a

static stretching exercise bout on flexibility and maximal strength. J Strength Cond Res, 2009; 23: 304-308

Barroso R, Tricoli V, Dos Santos Gil S, Ugrinowitsch C, Roschel H. Maximal strength, number of repetitions,

and total volume are differently affected by static-, ballistic-, and proprioceptive neuromuscular

facilitation stretching. J Strength Cond Res, 2012; 26: 2432-2437

Beedle B, Rytter SJ, Healy RC, Ward TR. Pretesting static and dynamic stretching does not affect maximal

strength. J Strength Cond Res, 2008; 22: 1838-1843

Chen CH, Chen TC, Jan MH, Lin JJ. Acute Effects of Static Active or Dynamic Active Stretching on Eccentric

Exercise-Induced Hamstring Muscle Damage. Int J Sports Physiol Perform , 2014; 9

Costa PB, Herda TJ, Herda AA, Cramer JT. Effects of dynamic stretching on strength, muscle imbalance, and

muscle activation. Med Sci Sports Exerc , 2014; 46: 586-593Cramer JT, Beck TW, Housh TJ, Massey LL, Marek SM, Danglemeier S, Purkayasthac S, Culbertsond JY,

Fitzc KA, Egana AD. Acute effects of static stretching on characteristics of the isokinetic angle–torque

relationship, surface electromyography, and mechanomyography. J Sports Sci, 2007; 25: 687-698

Cramer JT, Housh TJ, Coburn JW, Beck TW, Johnson GO. Acute effects of static stretching on maximal

eccentric torque production in women. J Strength Cond Res, 2006; 20: 354- 358

Cramer JT, Housh TJ, Johnson GO, Miller JM, Coburn JW, Beck TW. Acute effects of static stretching on peak

torque in women. J Strength Cond Res, 2004; 18: 236- 241

Fowles J, Sale D, MacDougall J. Reduced strength after passive stretch of the human plantar flexors. J Appl

Physiol, 2000; 89: 1179-1188

Franco BL, Signorelli GR, Trajano GS, Oliveira CG. Acute effects of different stretching exercises on muscular

endurance. J Strength Cond Res, 2008; 22: 1832-1837

Unauthenticated



9/9



Gomes TM, Simão R, Marques MC, Costa PB, Novaes JS. Acute effects of two different stretching methods

on local muscular endurance performance. J Strength Cond Res, 2011; 25: 745-752

Hindle KB, Whitcomb TJ, Briggs WO, Hong J. Proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF): Its

Mechanisms and effects on range of motion a and muscular function. J Hum Kinet, 2012; 31: 105- 113

Kato E, Vieillevoye S, Balestra C, Guissard N, Duchateau J. Acute effect of muscle stretching on thesteadiness of sustained submaximal contractions of the plantar flexor muscles. J Appl Physiol, 2011;

110: 407-415

Lieber RL. The physiological basis of rehabilitation: skeletal muscle structure, function, & plasticity . Lippincott

Williams & Wilkins; 2010

Manoel ME, Harris-Love MO, Danoff JV, Miller TA. Acute effects of static, dynamic, and proprioceptive

neuromuscular facilitation stretching on muscle power in women. J Strength Cond Res, 2008; 22: 1528-

1534

Nelson AG, Kokkonen J, Arnall DA. Acute muscle stretching inhibits muscle strength endurance

performance. J Strength Cond Res, 2005; 19: 338-343

Ogura Y, Miyahara Y, Naito H, Katamoto S, Aoki J. Duration of static stretching influences muscle forceproduction in hamstring muscles. J Strength Cond Res, 2007; 21: 788

Rhea MR. Determining the magnitude of treatment effects in strength training research through the use of

the effect size. J Strength Cond Res, 2004; 18: 918-920

Rubini EC, André LLC, Paulo SCG. Effects of stretching on strength performance. Sports Med, 2007; 37: 213-

224

Sá MA, Gomes TM, Bentes CM, Costa e Silva G, Rodrigues Neto G, Novaes JS. Acute effect of static and

proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation stretching methods in the maximum number of repetitions

in a single strength training session performance. Motricidade, 2013; 9: 73-81

Sekir U, Arabaci R, Akova B, Kadagan SM. Acute effects of static and dynamic stretching on leg flexor and

extensor isokinetic strength in elite women athletes. Scand J Med Sci Sports , 2010; 20: 268-81

Wallmann HW, Christensen SD, Perry C, Hoover DL. The acute effects of various types of stretching static,

dynamic, ballistic, and no stretch of the iliopsoas on 40-yard sprint times in recreational runners. Int J

Sports Phys Ther, 2012; 7: 540-547

Winchester JB, Nelson AG, Kokkonen J. A single 30-s stretch is sufficient to inhibit maximal voluntary

strength. Res Q Exerc Sport, 2009; 80: 257-261

Yamaguchi T, Ishii K, Yamanaka M, Yasuda K. Acute effect of static stretching on power output during

concentric dynamic constant external resistance leg extension. J Strength Cond Res, 2006; 20: 804-810

Corresponding author:

Pablo B. Costa, PhD

Associate Professor

Exercise Physiology Laboratory

Department of Kinesiology

California State University, Fullerton

800 N. State College Blvd., KHS 254

Fullerton, CA 92831

Office: (657) 278-4232

Email: [email protected]

Unauthenticated

acute effects of different stretching techniques on the number of repetitions in a single lower body...

Documents